Delete a worker

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and non-readOnly, and the description adds what those annotations cannot say: that schedules are deleted along with the worker, that past runs survive, that the action is irreversible, and that user confirmation is required. It also states the return shape, so an agent knows exactly what it gets back.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four short sentences, each carrying a distinct and necessary fact: scope, exclusion plus alternative, data-retention consequence, and irreversibility plus return shape. Nothing is redundant and the destructive nature is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter destructive tool with an output schema, the description covers the exclusion rule, side effects on schedules, preservation of run history, reversibility, and the confirmation requirement. No meaningful gap remains that an agent would need before calling it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter already carries the 24-character hex pattern, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates that deletion is "by id," adding no format or lookup semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: "Permanently deletes one custom worker by id and its schedules," and it distinguishes the custom-worker case from the built-in/default case. An agent can tell this apart from heliyos_workers_update or heliyos_workers_get without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly names the exclusion ("Default (built-in) workers cannot be deleted") and gives the alternative tool and parameter for that case ("pause them with heliyos_workers_update is_active false"). It also states a precondition on invocation: confirm with the user first.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.